Is it possible to talk with an atheist?

[siti]

@siti, if you do not see a difference then you should probably just bow out of the discussion.

Oh dear!

I put Kalam's two premises in one, Craig has:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause and 2. the universe (aka everything) began to exist

I had: 1. Everything (aka the universe) had a cause/beginning (i.e. had a beginning and/or/therefore a cause)

Logically it means exactly the same as what Craig says - the only difference being that I don't get paid for writing it in more words.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Oh dear!

I put Kalam's two premises in one, Craig has:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause and 2. the universe (aka everything) began to exist

I had: 1. Everything (aka the universe) had a cause/beginning (i.e. had a beginning and/or/therefore a cause)

Logically it means exactly the same as what Craig says - the only difference being that I don't get paid for writing it in more words.

^ this is really not worth my time ...

 

[siti]

^ this is really not worth my time ...

Then don't waste any more on it - just post your logical proof that universe had a beginning. It can't be that hard if its so obvious.

 

[columbus]

^ this is really not worth my time ...

<yawn> ignore </yawn>
Tom

 

[leibowde84]

Then don't waste any more on it - just post your logical proof that universe had a beginning. It can't be that hard if its so obvious.

Don't worry, he does this a lot. He's just trolling.

 

[Willamena]

Oh dear!

I put Kalam's two premises in one, Craig has:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause and 2. the universe (aka everything) began to exist

I had: 1. Everything (aka the universe) had a cause/beginning (i.e. had a beginning and/or/therefore a cause)

Logically it means exactly the same as what Craig says - the only difference being that I don't get paid for writing it in more words.

Employ the negation.
In the first premise, the negation is "whatever does not begin to exist has no cause." In your premise, the negation is "Nothing had a cause/beginning."

They are not the same.

 

[siti]

Employ the negation.
In the first premise, the negation is "whatever does not begin to exist has no cause." In your premise, the negation is "Nothing had a cause/beginning."

They are not the same.

Thanks Willamena, but that's not right either I'm afraid. You have negated the first one twice and mine only once and then inappropriately.

First one could be: "whatever begins to exist does not have a cause"
Then mine would be "everything does not have a cause/beginning" - both the same

If you want to negate the "everything" part of mine, the negation should be "not everything" rather than "nothing" and then you would also have to apply the same thing to the first one which would have to become "not everything that begins to exist has a cause", whilst mine would be "not everything has a cause/beginning".

 

[Willamena]

Thanks Willamena, but that's not right either I'm afraid. You have negated the first one twice and mine only once and then inappropriately.

First one could be: "whatever begins to exist does not have a cause"
Then mine would be "everything does not have a cause/beginning" - both the same

If you want to negate the "everything" part of mine, the negation should be "not everything" rather than "nothing" and then you would also have to apply the same thing to the first one which would have to become "not everything that begins to exist has a cause", whilst mine would be "not everything has a cause/beginning".

Thank you, but the first is not negated twice, it's an elimination (my bad). Your iteration is correct.

 

[Sanmario]

Thanks everyone for your presence and participation.

Now, I like to ask people here, what is the difference between philosophy and science?

 

[Sanmario]

@leibowde84


Now, I have said that I will focus on talking with you, so let us continue to talk.


You are of the idea that there cannot be a falsifiable concept of God.

Do you at all have a concept of God, even not falsifiable?

Here is my concept of God:
In concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

Don't factor in your question whether it is falsifiable or not.

You understand that sentence, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning:, yes? no?

 

[Sanmario]

@Willamena



Dear lady Willa, you are online, what do you say about my two latest posts?

It is Saturday in my place, I can talk the whole day in the net, but of course I await to deal with leibowde84 when he comes along.

This thread is on Is it possible to talk with an atheist, but anyone is welcome to for us to talk, just don't go away throwing a stink bomb on your way out.

Is it possible to talk with an atheist?
____________________


I am a theist, and I love to talk with atheists on the issue of God exists or not.

Is it possible to talk with them, and I am not into converting them to accept the existence of God, but just to get to learn from them to think better, on the issue God exists or not.

To learn from them as to think better, am I lying?

No, I am not lying, I really want to see how they think as to themselves come to their position that there is no God; in that way I can and will get to be a better thinker, from knowing how others think who do not share my position of God existing.

It is like that I eat meat and vegetable, but there are folks who are vegetarians, so by talking with them on how to eat better, I can and will learn to adopt a better diet.


So, let me see if any atheists will talk with me.

 

[Sanmario]

@columbus


Willa was online just now, she left.

Okay, Columbus, you are on.

 

[Sanmario]

@columbus


You describe yourself as conservative catholic from hell, and religion > none, but I see you still care to talk about God or no God, that is why you are hanging about in religiousforums.com?

You get quite irritable, no need to be of such an irritable attitude, that is not good to be in hell, hahahaha - becauce in hell there is in-extinguishable fire, so you are not bothered with irritation but with extreme agony, thus gnashing your teeth; for guys who are toothless, denture will be provided freely.

 

[Sanmario]

@Jayhawker Soule

Welcome!


Please, react to these latest posts from me, one on what is the difference between philosophy and science, and an other one on concept of God prescinding from falsifiable concept or not.

Here is my concept of God, concisely, precisely, and no bother with whether falsifiable or not, but in just clear simple language, to wit:
God in concept is the creator of everything with a beginning.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

@Jayhawker Soule

Welcome!
Here is my concept of God, concisely, precisely, and no bother with whether falsifiable or not, but in just clear simple language, to wit: God in concept is the creator of everything with a beginning.

<yawn>

See post #155 ... (and try to be less sophomoric).​

</yawn>

 

[Sanmario]

You say: "See post #155 ... (and try to be less sophomoric)."

Tell me what your referred to post says, no need for me to go there, if you know what is its core, otherwise you are just into wasting my time and my trouble.

<yawn>

See post #155 ... (and try to be less sophomoric).​

</yawn>

 

[Willamena]

Thanks everyone for your presence and participation.

Now, I like to ask people here, what is the difference between philosophy and science?

Philosophy is the love of wisdom, science is the modeling of reality.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I am a theist, and I love to talk with atheists on the issue of God exists or not.

Is it possible to talk with them, and I am not into converting them to accept the existence of God, but just to get to learn from them to think better, on the issue God exists or not.

To learn from them as to think better, am I lying?

No, I am not lying, I really want to see how they think as to themselves come to their position that there is no God; in that way I can and will get to be a better thinker, from knowing how others think who do not share my position of God existing.

It is like that I eat meat and vegetable, but there are folks who are vegetarians, so by talking with them on how to eat better, I can and will learn to adopt a better diet.


So, let me see if any atheists will talk with me.

How I have come to the conclusion that there is no God is really quite simple and I suspect that you completely understand why. All you have to do is consider why you don't believe in say the God Odin or Vishnu. Chances are many of the reasons you don't believe in those gods are also the reasons why I don't believe in whatever god you happen to believe in.

 

[Willamena]

@Willamena

Dear lady Willa, you are online, what do you say about my two latest posts?

It is Saturday in my place, I can talk the whole day in the net, but of course I await to deal with leibowde84 when he comes along.

This thread is on Is it possible to talk with an atheist, but anyone is welcome to for us to talk, just don't go away throwing a stink bomb on your way out.

Please be aware that this is a bulletin board, and not a chat room.

I responded to the second last post. The last post was not addressed to me.

 

[Willamena]

If I may....

You are of the idea that there cannot be a falsifiable concept of God.

Do you at all have a concept of God, even not falsifiable?

The concept of God that is not falsifiable is the one that holds God apart form the universe, apart from time, and not answerable to human perception.

Here is my concept of God:
In concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

That's a lovely image of God, with each thing in its creation brought forth by being.